Instructional Leadership is the Way Forward NAPD By Verity Swan

Instructional Leadership is the Way Forward NAPD By Verity Swan Instructional leadership is the dynamic delivery of the curriculum in the classroom through strategies based on reflection, assessment and evaluation to ensure optimum learning. Verity Swan has been following a doctoral research programme on Instructional Leadership for the last eight years. She has worked closely with members of the National Association of Principals and Deputy Principals in Ireland [NAPD], which has adopted a policy of promoting Instructional Leadership with the members of the Association. Here she outlines her findings. The research, reported below, was an illuminative evaluation of instructional leadership requiring in its later stages the participation of current post-primary Principals and Deputy Principals. THE RESEARCH PROGRAMME The study of instructional leadership commenced when the author, undertaking comparative exploratory surveys into teacher employment patterns (teacher recruitment, teacher turnover and retention), in Ireland and Texas, at post-primary and high school level, visited Texas in 2002. The Texan Principals claimed that they could make a positive difference in the experience of a teacher through instructional leadership, in marked contrast to the response to the questions on leadership of the Irish Principals, who saw their role as mainly managerial / administrative. This led to an investigation of the effect of school culture which provided further information on Principal and instructional leadership. The need to investigate instructional leadership was reinforced in 2005 by NAPD, which informed the Minister for Education & Science that instructional leadership was the way forward in school leadership. Thus the aim of the study became: The clarification of the term instructional leadership both in theory and in practice The establishment of what elements if any of instructional leadership could already be found in post-primary schools in Ireland The identification of a model for the implementation of instructional leadership in post-primary schools in Ireland In general, most literature does not define any of these leaderships clearly: this led to extensive searches of literature on school leadership in order to construct sound definitions. However the author found a development in the general theory of leadership, from individual leadership to shared leadership, which is reflected in the thinking on educational leadership (Sergiovanni 1991; Rallis and Goldring, 2000) where it focuses particularly on teaching and learning. A recent study of transformational leadership and instructional leadership (Robinson, Lloyd and Rowe, 2008) has shown the outstanding importance of instructional leadership for teaching and learning - the core aims of the school as identified by NAPD (2005). 1

The literature search and accompanying interviews with educators and post-primary Principals in 2006-07 revealed that the term instructional leadership, although frequently used, required a detailed investigation to find out its precise meaning both in the theory and the practice. This investigation included a survey of the opinions of postprimary Principals and Deputy Principals. The methodology was that of illuminative evaluation, about which Burden, (1998, p.17) writes: The ongoing collaborative process of collecting information and gathering participants perceptions should incorporate also feedback and discussion of a regular nature such that the final illuminations are made up of a number of small candles (or even fireworks...) which have been lit along the way Qualitative tools, using grounded theory for interview analysis, were employed in the initial stages of the research. The survey in 2009, using a questionnaire, produced quantitative information from 398 principals. SPSS was used to analyse the data. THE SURVEY The survey of the opinions of Principals and Deputy Principals on instructional leadership was sent out early January 2009 and was analysed between April and May 2009. The questionnaire consisted of two sections, A and B. Section A requested background data; Section B, which had four parts, was concerned with the theory and practice of instructional leadership in Irish post-primary schools. THE FINDINGS Clarification of the term instructional leadership. The following definition of instructional leadership emerged from the study of literature and the 2006-07 interviews: Instructional leadership is the dynamic delivery of the curriculum in the classroom through strategies based on reflection, assessment and evaluation to ensure optimum learning. 1 This definition was accepted by a large number of respondents in the 2009 survey, but was not supported by their practice, according to their response to questions in the survey (Section B, parts 2,3,4). Factorial analysis of the data suggests strongly that the term instructional leadership is generally not understood and thus its practice, if any, must be uneven. It is clear that elements of instructional leadership are being practised in some postprimary schools in Ireland but frequently are not recognised as such. These practices include homework policy, discussions on teaching and learning, classroom visitation that some respondents in the 2009 survey claimed to do. Factorial analysis of the data suggests strongly that the term instructional leadership is generally not understood and thus its practice, if any, must be uneven. The definition needs to be read in conjunction with definitions of educational leadership and curriculum leadership as these three leaderships are interconnected, not only in the 1 The derivation of this definition is found in the work of Clandinin and Connelly 1992, Heywood, 2008, Bradley 2004. 2

literature (McEwan, 2003; Glatthorn, Boschee and Whitehead, 2006), but also in the examples of common sense, everyday practice as found in operational definitions (Bradley, 2004; Heywood, 2008) and in the response of Principals and Deputy Principals who referred to happy schools (glossary) in the 2006-07 interviews and those who responded in a positive way to the relevant questions in the survey in 2009. THE VIEWS OF INTERESTED PARTNERS NAPD has stated that instructional leadership is the way forward. This aspiration is in line with international literature on what must be done to ensure good teaching and learning (Mc Kinsey, 2007). From the evidence of this research all education partners 2 are avowedly enthusiastic in terms of ensuring optimum teaching and learning for students. The introduction of instructional leadership has to start with the teacher in the classroom with the support of the Principal who is himself or herself well versed in instructional and curriculum leadership through relevant training. Literature exists for this purpose, including the book Instructional and Curriculum Leadership Towards Inquiry Oriented Schools by Heywood 3 (2008), which was sponsored by NAPD. CURRENT OBSTACLES Current obstacles to the practice of instructional leadership in Irish post-primary schools: That classroom visitation is not a tradition in Ireland, is an obstacle to instructional leadership. Currently the Principal appears to be apart from the classroom experience of teaching and learning (Section B, parts 2,3,4). The culture in some Irish post-primary schools appears, from the evidence of the written comments in section B, 2,3,4 in the survey, to have remained unchanged in a changing world, thus creating difficulties for those who would wish to innovate in order to deal with the needs of that changing world. THE RATIONALE OF INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP A PERSONAL VIEW Unlike Parlett, we do not believe that this (evaluation) can ever be a neutral process. Every evaluator, just like every educational psychologist, brings her/his values to bear on all that she/he does. The successful evaluator is aware of these and presents them openly and honestly as part of her/his reflections on what has been revealed. (Burden, 1998, p.17) The author is satisfied that instructional leadership, focusing as it does on teaching and learning in the classroom, is an essential leadership for post-primary schools. As seen in the literature what happens in the classroom, whether through the planned curriculum, the hidden curriculum or indeed the null curriculum (Bradley, 2004, p. 13) 4, has a major effect on the student in the immediate and long-term future. Instructional leadership has to start with the teacher in the classroom with the support of the Principal Like any other innovation, instructional leadership has to start in a small way respecting the undoubtedly good work, which has been and is being done generally in many Irish 2 In the spirit of illuminative evaluation, the author had interviewed teachers in 2004 about instructional leadership and assisted in the facilitation of courses in instructional leadership in 2007 and 2008. 3 Heywood s books (2008,2009) show how the three leaderships are interconnected in the context of the inquiry-oriented school. 3

post-primary schools. The author s contention is that, if instructional leadership is implemented, all members of the school community can move forward in the knowledge that whatever the current economic, political or social climate, optimum teaching and learning is being achieved for their students. Better relations between members of the school community will arise from the preparation, which must precede the implementation of instructional leadership. Implementation will also ensure other current difficulties are overcome including better use of time by members of the school community. That instructional leadership is not the norm in Irish post-primary schools means that there are many lost opportunities for both teachers and students and according to the data from the survey, poor interpersonal relationships in some schools. It is shocking to think that some post-primary Principals (10% of survey respondents) can report in 2010 that they cannot enter classrooms. It is shocking to think that some post-primary Principals (10% of survey respondents) can report in 2010 that they cannot enter classrooms. The literature on leadership shows the development from one sole leader to a sharing leadership, yet students in schools, where lack of good inter-personal and inter-professional relationships prevent their Principals and teachers working together, gives a very different message. The author does not think that instructional leadership necessitates that the Principal works with the teacher in the classroom (Marzano, 2003) but thinks that the opportunity and possibility must be there. Leaving aside the notion that every teacher is a manager (Heywood, 2009), the distinction between the Principal managing the school and the teacher managing the classroom is acceptable in terms of responsibilities and duties. What is unacceptable is that, from the evidence of the survey of Principals and Deputy Principals in 2009, in some schools the respondents felt excluded from classrooms or felt that they had no place there. These fears may not be based on reality since there is evidence too (CBR, 2007) to suggest that teachers attitudes towards their Principals are changing. But certainly, from the evidence of this research, such misunderstanding becomes an obstacle to innovation in some post-primary schools. The research data from this study also suggested that the knowledge which some Principals and Deputy Principals have of Department of Education s policies and trade union regulations appear to be at variance with current agreements from their answers to Section B, parts 2, 3, 4. Discussions that the author has had with officers of the trade unions have shown their interest in education research, as well as their interest in innovation, with the proviso that conditions for their members are right. Other misconceptions were uncovered during the research study. The survey in 2009 showed that some Principals felt they could not go ahead with innovation since the teachers would object. The evidence from teachers in this research is that they will be happy to involve themselves in change for the well being of their students, provided that they are fully aware of the reasons for innovation and have the knowledge to implement innovation where appropriate. It seems that some Principals may misinterpret their teachers attitudes. What emerged from the survey was that some teachers and some Principals are not happy in their respective work. From the evidence of Principals and Deputy Principals who do engage in such activities in Ireland there is a culture of openness beneficial to all within the learning community of their schools, which subsequently has an influence on society. Students in such schools see teachers working together, teachers working with the Principal and Deputy Principal, teachers welcoming visitors to the school. Usually in such school climates, the students too have been actively involved in school life, which makes it possible to implement recent directives from the DES requiring student councils in schools. 4

THE CHOSEN MODEL The author proposes a model of instructional leadership which involves all members of the school community and which will lead to an inquiry-oriented school (Heywood, 2008). The model requires teacher leadership in the classroom in conjunction with an educational leadership in the school (focused on teaching and learning) and a curriculum leadership, which serves both. These leaderships are all exercised by those who, through training, have a thorough understanding of the dynamic qualities of instructional leadership. The model of instructional leadership which this research study has identified is one in which the teacher in the classroom becomes the instructional leader, implementing strategies (based on action research) which will ensure the optimum learning for the students, on a daily basis. The Principal with a close knowledge of the practice of instructional leadership, both as a former teacher and as an active participant in instructional leadership training programmes, which will be described in the next section, ensures educational leadership for all instructional and curriculum leaders within the school and beyond 5. The important matter is that leadership of teaching and learning (instructional leadership) commences in the classroom in the daily relationship between teacher and students, which affirms Heywood s model (2008, 2009) of instructional leadership. The author proposes a model of instructional leadership which involves all members of the school and which will lead to an inquiry-oriented school Where this model clarifies Heywood s model is that the individual teacher is the instructional leader requiring the support of a Principal who has a full understanding of instructional leadership from his/her current role as an educational leader and from his/her former role as an instructional leader in the classroom. Curriculum leadership will be undertaken by teachers who as instructional leaders are fully conversant with the pedagogic knowledge base, share their ideas in an active manner and conduct their work through reflection, discussion and evaluation in a learning environment. According to Bradley (2005, p.10) a different order of work practice is required from curriculum leaders than from instructional or educational leaders. In this model the teachers work together as instructional leaders and share the responsibility with their colleagues, including the Principal, in the inquiry-oriented school, which is focused on teaching and learning. This model has the advantage of overcoming obstacles such as subject specialisation in the post-primary schools, which differentiates the sector from the primary school sector, and the perceived opposition from different agencies. A recent study by Rushe (2010) illustrates the differences between the primary and post-primary sectors in relation to instructional leadership. Once in place this model will become self-generating. However the introduction of such a model necessitates certain steps, which are based on the findings of this research study. TRAINING REQUIREMENTS 5 This model allows for the implementation of systems leadership (Pont, Nusche and Moorman: 2008) whereby Principals work with schools other than their own. 5

The implementation of instructional leadership necessitates training for each member of the school community in instructional and curriculum leadership; training is required in all schools, but on an individual school basis. There has to be the recognition that: schools are different. long held traditions exist (classroom visitations are not the usual practice). positive interpersonal, professional relationships are essential for the well being (and thus the successful learning of students, teachers and principals) in any school. This research has identified three different cultures in schools: Schools in which Principal and teachers are used to working together and Principals feel comfortable about visiting classrooms. Schools where Principal and teachers have no traditions of classroom visits but do have a mutual respect. Schools in which there appears to be a culture which inhibits any innovation Recognising the importance of fit between teacher and school (Evans, 1998), the author suggests that training must take account of these differences. The results of this approach should be better teaching and learning and better relationships between principals and teachers since everyone together moves towards an inquiry-oriented school. CONCLUSION Instructional leadership was found to be crucial for optimum teaching and learning, requiring training for all members of the school community. The teacher is the instructional leader in the classroom with the full and knowledgeable support of the Principal in a school which prioritises teaching and learning for all members through mutual sharing and respect. BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE Verity Swan was a teacher, Deputy Principal and Acting Principal in a large north Dublin secondary school until 2002. Throughout her teaching career Verity has undertaken classroom and school-based research focused on optimum teaching and learning. She chose to research the induction of teachers, new to a school for her M.Ed. thesis in 1996. Verity is very interested in comparative education. She has undertaken a comparative exploratory study of teacher retention in Ireland and Texas. She is currently Chairperson of the Society for Management in Education in Ireland (SMEI) which is associated with the European Forum on Educational Administration (EFEA). Verity recently completed a doctorate on Instructional Leadership in Trinity College, Dublin. Contact veritysswan@eircom.net 6